Dismissed

Satendra Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC27 Nov 2019CR. MISC./56619/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Patna dismissed an application for anticipatory bail sought by the petitioner in a case involving murder and illegal possession of arms. The court refused bail due to circumstantial evidence against the petitioner and his status as a proclaimed offender who was evading arrest, deeming the application unfit for consideration at this stage.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail dismissed; petitioner declared not entitled to privilege of bail.

Satendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56619 of 2019

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2019 Thana- PUNPUN District- Patna

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Satendra Kumar, Son of Late Umedh Singh Resident of Mahuli, P.S.Persabazar, District- Patna

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rakesh Bihari Singh, Adv. Mr. Dhananjay Prasad Gupta, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶10

4 27-11-2019

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶12

APP for the State.

¶13

The petitioner in this case is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Punpun P.S. Case No.168 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter relates to a land dispute and there was an agreement in respect of the land in question between the petitioner and the deceased.

¶15

Learned APP for the State is present and has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. It is submitted that in the case diary circumstantial evidences have come

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56619 of 2019(4) dt.27-11-2019 2/2

¶17

against the petitioner and further that process under Section 8283 Cr.P.C. has already been exhausted, therefore, at this stage the present application is not fit to be entertained.

¶18

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case wherein some circumstantial evidences are there against the petitioner and the petitioner is evading his arrest, he has been declared proclaimed offender, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to him.

¶19

This application is dismissed.

¶20

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

¶21

arvind/-

¶22

U T

Satendra Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satendra Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rama Kant Singh @ Ramakant Patel Vs The State of Bihar

Satish Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Shahjad Khan @ Shahjad Khan Vs The State of Bihar

Rajesh Kumar @ Dippu Kumar @ Dipu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Badshah @ Md. Sajjad Vs The State of Bihar

Ajit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar